Dismissed¶27

Mofidul Hussain, v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC1 Jul 2026Bail Appln./1745/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court, Bail Appln./1745/2026, decided 02.07.2026 by Pranjal Das, J. — regular bail application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 rejected; case arising from Krishnai P.S. Case No. 44/2026 under Sections 69 and 351(2) & (3) BNS, 2023; allegations of love affair, physical relationship, threat to make private photographs viral and repeated non-consensual physical relationship; FIR dated 07.06.2026; arrest 13.06.2026; victim's JMFC statement corroborates FIR on threat; medical report of mental trauma consistent with blackmail; electronic device sent for forensic examination; investigation pending; bail refused, case diary returned.

What did the court decide?

The allegations of threat to make the victim's private photographs viral find place both in the FIR and in her statement recorded before the learned JMFC. ¶23

Mofidul Hussain, Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010132382026

2026:GAU-AS:9456

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./1745/2026

¶6

MOFIDUL HUSSAIN,

¶7

SON OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR, RESIDENT OF KARBALA WARD NO. 13, P.S. GOALPARA, DISTRICT GOALPARA, ASSAM.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, MR. M A CHOUDHURY,MR A AHMED,U U KHAN,MISS. P M AHMED,MR. M Z CHOUDHURY

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS

¶13

ORDER

¶14

02.07.2026

¶15

Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned APP for the State.

¶16

This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Sanhita, 2023, seeking the grant of regular bail to the petitioner, namely, Mofidul Hussain, in connection with Krishnai P.S. Case No. 44/2026, registered under Sections 69 and 351(2) & (3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner was arrested on 13.06.2026.

¶19

The alleged victim lodged the FIR on 07.06.2026. The allegations, in a nutshell, are that while she was working at a Suzuki showroom in the locality, she became acquainted with its owner, who was later identified as Mofidul Islam. It is alleged that they developed a love affair, during which they also established a physical relationship.

¶20

The informant further alleged that the petitioner thereafter threatened to make their private photographs viral and, by extending such threats, repeatedly compelled her to maintain a physical relationship against her will on several occasions. It is also alleged that as a result of such acts, she became mentally distressed and remained confined to her house.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the electronic evidence, if any, has already been seized by the police.

¶22

The case diary has been received.

¶23

In her statement recorded during the investigation before the learned JMFC, she has made assertions on similar lines as in the FIR, including allegations that the petitioner threatened to make her private photographs viral. The allegations of threat thus find place both in the FIR as well as in her statement recorded before the learned JMFC.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

It is also revealed from the case diary that the victim was referred for medical examination and the medical report indicates mental trauma consistent with allegations of blackmail. It further appears that one electronic device has been sent for forensic examination.

¶26

Investigation is still in progress at this stage. I deem it prudent to refuse bail at this stage.

¶27

Accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected.

¶28

The case diary is returned.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Mofidul Hussain, v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mofidul Hussain, v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Thomas Pao Vs the State of Assam

Shri Jamal Uddin Vs the Union of India

Satminthang Khongsai and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Ashin Khumba and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Ranjit Rai and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Injamamul Hoque Alias Injamul Hoque Vs State of Assam